Dolphin Ratings - Women's National Basketball Association

Explanation: Each team is listed with its record, overall score differential, and its ratings. Brief explanations of the ratings follow.

Schedule The number in this column is the effective opponent strength of a team. In other words, they would be expected to have the same record had they played all games against an opponent of this predictive rating at a neutral site. Because this calculation depends on the strength of the team in question, it is not possible to rank schedules using these values.
Expected Losses For college teams, this number is the number of losses an average ranked (top 15 hockey; otherwise top 25) team would be expected to have against the team's schedule. For pro teams, this is the number of losses an average team would be expected to have against the team's schedule. Unlike the schedule ranking, this value can be used to rank schedules.
Standard Ranks teams in an order such that a team is "probably better" than all teams ranked lower than it. This calculation uses margin of victory only for computing a team's opponents strengths; the team's rating itself is computed using only wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule
Median Likelihood Determines the likely ratings for each team, based on its wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule. This generally produces the same or similar ratings as the standard ranking.
Predictive Both schedule strength and rating vs. schedule strength are determined considering both the wins and losses and the score differentials. This rating contains none of the biases in the standard rating, but does weight recent games slightly more than past games since those are a better indication of the team's current strength. This rating is the best of the first three for seeing how good teams are, and thus is the best for predicting future results.
Improved RPI Rating The improved RPI formula is similar to the standard RPI, except that the schedule strength is carried out to infinite depth instead of ending with opponents' opponents, thus allows for a better comparison of isolated groups of teams than is given by the standard RPI calculation. It is similar to the simple rating, except that all games are given equal weight.
Scoring. This value indicates how many points a team would be expected to score if it played an identical team.
Offense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team scores. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to score the league average number of points. This does not necessarily rate a team's offensive abilities, as a fast pace in basketball or big-play defense in football can make a team score more points.
Defense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team allows. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to allow the league average number of points. The same caveat in the predictive-offense rating applies here.

In order to increase early-season stability, the three main rankings, the improved RPI, and the college pseudopoll include priors based on the previous season final predictive ratings and occasionally incorporating preseason predictions of various major publications. The other rankings for college sports do not include priors, and thus can be wildly unstable early in the year. A team whose rankings are affected by this prior is noted with a P following its rankings.

Full Ranking

                                            STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI    SCORING     OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
MINNESOTA   34  8 3457 3108  0.027 19.342    1  0.762    1  0.732    1  0.623    1 0.5705    5  3.582    3  0.664    2  0.581
INDIANA     24 16 3087 2982  0.004 18.987    2  0.243    2  0.225    5  0.117    3 0.5190    6  3.545    5  0.003    5  0.231
ATLANTA     24 18 3450 3383  0.077 21.169    3  0.234    3  0.206    2  0.273    2 0.5200    2  3.689    2  0.779    8 -0.233
CONNECTICUT 21 15 2872 2770  0.017 17.242    4  0.207    5  0.177    3  0.212    5 0.5164    4  3.583    4  0.258    7  0.165
SEATTLE     22 15 2672 2605 -0.034 17.211    5  0.205    4  0.182    7  0.098    4 0.5182   12  3.397   10 -0.607    1  0.803
PHOENIX     21 18 3408 3360  0.061 19.579    6  0.168    6  0.139    8  0.033    6 0.5145    1  3.827    1  1.179   12 -1.112
NEW YORK    20 17 2805 2760  0.028 18.129    7  0.145    7  0.115    4  0.118    8 0.5081    9  3.525    7 -0.077    3  0.313
SAN ANTONIO 19 18 2856 2794  0.058 18.419    8  0.088    8  0.058    6  0.114    7 0.5084    7  3.543    6 -0.008    4  0.235
LOS ANGELES 15 19 2623 2731 -0.049 16.642    9 -0.165    9 -0.170   10 -0.296    9 0.4848    3  3.597    8 -0.192   10 -0.401
CHICAGO     14 20 2524 2556  0.001 16.702   10 -0.190   10 -0.203    9 -0.088   10 0.4775   10  3.508    9 -0.352    6  0.176
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
WASHINGTON   6 28 2409 2678 -0.011 17.561   11 -0.719   11 -0.733   11 -0.596   11 0.4253   11  3.498   11 -0.904    9 -0.288
TULSA        3 31 2353 2789 -0.051 17.588   12 -0.978   12 -1.018   12 -0.875   12 0.4065    8  3.530   12 -1.052   11 -0.699

WESTERN CONFERENCE
                                            STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI    SCORING     OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
MINNESOTA   34  8 3457 3108  0.027 19.342    1  0.762    1  0.732    1  0.623    1 0.5705    5  3.582    3  0.664    2  0.581
SEATTLE     22 15 2672 2605 -0.034 17.211    5  0.205    4  0.182    7  0.098    4 0.5182   12  3.397   10 -0.607    1  0.803
PHOENIX     21 18 3408 3360  0.061 19.579    6  0.168    6  0.139    8  0.033    6 0.5145    1  3.827    1  1.179   12 -1.112
SAN ANTONIO 19 18 2856 2794  0.058 18.419    8  0.088    8  0.058    6  0.114    7 0.5084    7  3.543    6 -0.008    4  0.235
LOS ANGELES 15 19 2623 2731 -0.049 16.642    9 -0.165    9 -0.170   10 -0.296    9 0.4848    3  3.597    8 -0.192   10 -0.401
TULSA        3 31 2353 2789 -0.051 17.588   12 -0.978   12 -1.018   12 -0.875   12 0.4065    8  3.530   12 -1.052   11 -0.699

EASTERN CONFERENCE
                                            STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI    SCORING     OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM         W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  ELOSS  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
INDIANA     24 16 3087 2982  0.004 18.987    2  0.243    2  0.225    5  0.117    3 0.5190    6  3.545    5  0.003    5  0.231
ATLANTA     24 18 3450 3383  0.077 21.169    3  0.234    3  0.206    2  0.273    2 0.5200    2  3.689    2  0.779    8 -0.233
CONNECTICUT 21 15 2872 2770  0.017 17.242    4  0.207    5  0.177    3  0.212    5 0.5164    4  3.583    4  0.258    7  0.165
NEW YORK    20 17 2805 2760  0.028 18.129    7  0.145    7  0.115    4  0.118    8 0.5081    9  3.525    7 -0.077    3  0.313
CHICAGO     14 20 2524 2556  0.001 16.702   10 -0.190   10 -0.203    9 -0.088   10 0.4775   10  3.508    9 -0.352    6  0.176
WASHINGTON   6 28 2409 2678 -0.011 17.561   11 -0.719   11 -0.733   11 -0.596   11 0.4253   11  3.498   11 -0.904    9 -0.288

DIVISION             W   L   PCT  RNK RATING
EASTERN CONFERENCE 109 114 0.489    1  0.009
WESTERN CONFERENCE 114 109 0.511    2 -0.033

Home field advantage amounts to:
     0.354 points in main ratings (0.226 for semineutral)
     0.032 points in improved RPI (0.023 for semineutral)
Average of 2.15 points per score

Predict score:








Team Strength vs. Time Plot:






posted: Sat Jan  4 12:47:45 2020
games through: Fri Oct  7 2011

Back to Dolphin rankings main page.